※ [本文轉錄自 historia 看板] 作者: MRZ (LQY) 看板: historia 標題: 軍事史之史觀理論007 時間: Wed Jan 19 14:40:48 2005 Now, what did Delbrueck mean by the concept of Sachkritik? Described very simply, it means that all historical ‘facts’ (data), even if they have passed the most rigorous test of source criticism, must—in order to be scientifically acceptable—be tested as well against ‘reality’, that is in relation to the questions: is it possible, and at the same time credible that a certain fact has actually occurred, or that it really could have been such as it is rendered by the sources? The correctives available in this process are provided by (1) the ‘laws’ (condensed historical experience) of the theory of war (Kriegstheorie/theorie de la guerre), by (2) historically unchanged topo-geographic conditions, and by (3) what we know is physiologically or technically possible. Delbrueck's application of his Sachkritik was instrumental in demolishing or radically altering several ‘established truths’ about major battles or characteristics of classical and medieval warfare. This method of factual criticism soon became, and has remained, a conspicuous part of the normal approach of historians of warfare to their objects of study. It is, however, not entirely unquestioned among historians outside the branch. 既然如此﹐那麼德布呂克的‘實證考據主義’的定義是什麼﹖簡單來說﹐就是所有 的歷史‘事實(資料)’﹐它的來源必須先經過嚴格且仔細的考證﹐還得合乎科學的 分析﹐再經過詳細的驗證﹐才能確定該項‘事實(資料’的可信度與否﹖整個程序要 探討的主題﹐分別為下列三點﹕ 一﹑是否合乎戰爭理論(Kriegstheorie/theorie de la guerre)的定律﹖ 二﹑是否合乎戰場環境的變化﹖ 三﹑是否合乎當時的當事人心理與技術的條件﹖ 德布呂克的實證考據主義採用非常激烈的手段﹐去追求上古以及中古史上各場重大 戰役的‘事實真相’。從此實證考據主義的理論﹐從此成為戰爭形態史學家直至今 日所奉行的正統研究方式之一。問題是對於軍事史中其他學派的史學家而言﹐這種 作法並不是那麼的無懈可擊。 -- LQY附註﹕今天晚上11點半﹐各位可以在D頻道看到德布呂克大師理論的追尋者﹐是 如何考據歷史的﹖老實說﹐每次在D頻道看到歐美學者如此這般﹐我何止是羨慕的要 死而已﹖ -- 萬物皆非主，唯曼尼大神，至聖之先知，亞當史密斯。 La ilaha ill money，Adam Smith rasula'Llah 榮耀歸於曼尼。自宇宙之初成﹐貫古今與未來﹐直至永恆不滅。喀鏘！（收銀機響聲） Gloria patri Money. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum.Ka-ching! --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.30.77.184 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.250.145